Discuss the free solar panel company: A Shade Greener

K4blades

How so typical from someone who is totally opposed to FITs and PVs, no matter what anyone says he has to discredit it......which begs the question, are his points of any value if he can't be fair and objective?

Cardew wrote: »

What 'concrete feedback' would that be?


ASG do not fit export meters as far as I am aware. So how do the customers 'calculate' their savings?

They have installed well over 3000 systems, are all their clients stupid....it is a bigger database than the couple of pals that you constantly refer on this forum. If they say something positive about ASGs system, it doesn't make them wrong just because you don't like what they say.

Oh, and the export meter argument is a red-herring, there are lots of ways to calculate your savings.

The only way is to know how much electricity was generated and how much was exported.(EST say it is typically 75%) is to know the generated and exported figures.

EST also said that with a bigger than "typical" system, (such as one fitted by ASG), would give better results, if you've got a valid point, stop selective quoting, and quote the comments in full!

So if the ASG 3.3kWp system generates 3,000kWh pa and 2,250kWh is exported then 750kWh is used in the property which @ 10p/kWh is £75. pa.

I suspect 'customer's feedback' will be statements like 'last year I spent £xx and this year £yy.' Hardly concrete evidence that those savings are due to the PV system?

There are lots of ways to calculate how much you save....you don't need a degree on maths. There is nothing wrong with comparing last years bills with this years, as long as you are aware of what you are comparing.
Alternatively, you could look at someone, eg. a neighbour who may have had identical bills as you in the past, but hasn't got panels, (a bit like Cardew). If pre-panels you both spent £x but now you spend £x-100, but due to price increases, the neighbour spends £x+50, you have saved £150.00
The point being, with maths you can show whatever you want.
The fairest way to do it IMO, is not to consider £s, but to look at kwhs. Then you are not mislead by price changes, (that are increasing anyway, so improving the saving)
What is also true is that having PVs fitted, behaviour in the house will usually change a lot as electricity is not taken for granted....so some of the saving is not directly due to what is produced by the panels, but indirectly from having them there. This amount should not be underestimated and is a saving all the same, but as ASG clearly state, is dependent on how the occupiers manage their usage.
And then there will be variations due to "weather conditions", and we have had a very good spring, which will help the results when compared to last year. Most people with systems who track results on this forum suggest that they are generating about 30% more than expected for this year. Next year might be really bad, and could be 30% less.....but over 25 years, these things tend to average out.



There are many reports from people who have had their own systems for some while(some with export meters) and state how difficult it is to use the generated electricity in the house.

And many others have given good, constructive advice how to improve your savings.

It has been shown many times that people WANT to believe that they are making big savings for any device etc to justify their course of action and make completely unsupportable and exaggerated claims.

Many people who make a legally binding commitment to rent out their roof for 25 years - with it binding on future owners - will find it very difficult to admit the savings are less than they envisaged.

There are countless examples on MSE of such claims, for all manner of appliances and devices that save huge amounts - from Heat pumps right down to those who swear blind that a £10 magnet strapped to the fuel line of your car or oil central heating system reduces consumption by xx%

So basically, anyone who gets a rent-a-roof system has been taken in by the spooks with their witchcraft, we are all doomed, everyone must be totally stupid to fall for this while Cardew, with no PVs, is the font of all wisdom.
(By the way, this is the same man who said that
"there will be lots of days when you generate no electricity" which is a lie.
And that
"only those who own large detached houses can benefit", another lie.)

Secondly 30%-60% saving is meaningless! 30%-60% of what amount of electricity?

30%-60% of 1,000kWh is 300kWh to 600kWh.

30%-60% of 10,000kWh is 3,000kWh to 6,000kWh!

Well most people would take the common sense view that what they mean is on average, the average family, with one of their systems will save about 30 - 60% off compared to pre-panels.
I don't know many typical families that use only 1000, or 10,000KWHs per annum.....do you?

If ASG - and all of the other 'Rent a Roof' firms - were so confident that their systems provided much greater savings than the EST typical estimate of £70 they could very easily arrange for independently monitored trials of their systems.

But why would they, they don't have to answer to you, though you may think they should. Their seems to be a massive support from the people who have used ASG, (though you think they have all been brainwashed of course, ) and they speak highly of ASG. If there were lots of dissatisfaction and complaints, then I would agree with you, but if the people using the systems are happy with the results, then why should ASG, or anyone else have to verify their claims to people who clearly don't want to believe the results anyway.

Or perhaps ASG give a range of savings they think are 'typical' for their 3.3kWp. If they are so confident that the EST estimate is incorrect, what figure do ASG have in mind?

So come on ASG - why not put in writing what you feel are typical savings?

And that is ludicrous, how can they say exactly what someone might save when there are so many variables, (angles, pitch, etc not to mention individual households different usage, different appliances, some may have all electric heating, etc etc, and then there are different tariffs.) Giving an exact figure would be mis-leading, and you would make sure everyone knew it....so giving a range is the only fair way.
Everyone who has dealt with ASG says they are very open and transparent...which is more than can be said about some people who only want to discredit everything they see about FITs.

Cardew

K4blades wrote: »

How so typical from someone who is totally opposed to FITs and PVs, no matter what anyone says he has to discredit it......which begs the question, are his points of any value if he can't be fair and objective?

Readers of this forum might be interested in the following:

K4blades started posting on MSE and clashed with a number of posters - mainly in the Green forum. The disagreements were about his very poor electrical knowledge - despite apparently being an EPC assessor, which means you have done a course that lasts a couple of days -

However his almost evangelical support for A Shade Greener(ASG) was puzzling.

With a little ‘detective work’ one contributor found K4blades’ website and on it was the following:

'We have recently joined forces with a local supplier of solar panels who can offer you FREE electricity. For details contact me or visit their site by clicking on the logo.', the logo being ASG's.

His reply when ‘rumbled’.

I have my own business, and I am totally self employed. Some of my clients are solar panel installers.

Pity he didn't mention that earlier;)

Summed up by this post:

Unbelievable! Really unbelievable!

The rudest most abusive poster on this thread is doing so because he has a vested interest in ASG and 'rent a roof' schemes and wants to stifle any debate.

Nice one zeupater - at least he is totally discredited!

Incidentally despite the EST stating that £70 a year is a typical saving – K4blades states the following:

I have done thousands of these in the past few years and I can tell you that it is quite typical for an average house to save over £200 from PV electricity, without FITs.
This calculation is done using software developed over many years, tested and approved by BRE and CLG, in other words the figures are relatively reliable.

As with any software calculation I cannot think of a better way to demonstrate that ‘Rubbish In’ gets ‘Rubbish out’

So draw your own conclusions about the accuracy and impartiality of K4blades.

K4blades

Cardew wrote: »

Readers of this forum might be interested in the following:

K4blades started posting on MSE and clashed with a number of posters - mainly in the Green forum. The disagreements were about his very poor electrical knowledge - despite apparently being an EPC assessor, which means you have done a course that lasts a couple of days -

However his almost evangelical support for A Shade Greener(ASG) was puzzling.

With a little ‘detective work’ one contributor found K4blades’ website and on it was the following:



His reply when ‘rumbled’.



Pity he didn't mention that earlier;)

Summed up by this post:


Incidentally despite the EST stating that £70 a year is a typical saving – K4blades states the following:



As with any software calculation I cannot think of a better way to demonstrate that ‘Rubbish In’ gets ‘Rubbish out’

So draw your own conclusions about the accuracy and impartiality of K4blades.

Yet more lies but something here is very clear......

SOMEONE SAYS SOMETHING THEY DISAGREE WITH AND THEY GO SNOOPING INTO PRIVATE DETAILS ABOUT PEOPLE, JUST LIKE THE NEWS OF THE WORLD IN A HOPE TO FIND SOME PERSONAL DIRT TO DISCREDIT THEM.......WHICH DOESN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE FACTS OF THE ARGUMENT....AND HAVING SNOOPED AND LIED ABOUT WHAT I DO, CARDEW, THOUGH ASKED MANY TIMES REFUSES TO TELL ANY BODY WHAT HE DOES......WHICH IS WORK FOR AN OIL COMPANY!

HE'S ALL FOR DISCREDITING OTHERS OFTEN WITH LIES,BUT NEVER EvER ANSWERS A QUESTION THAT WOULD UNDERMINE HIS ARGUEMENT.

Over 3000 ASG customers and no reports of them being unhappy, read their posts. Cardew chooses to ignore them, discredit them, undermine them, suggest they have been conned or duped. He has no valid argument, he's just a school yard bully with an agenda, and wouldn't recognise a fact if he saw one.

(And 30000 overall FIT installations in the first 12 months, he hates the fact that others are benefiting from something he doesn't like, but he's losing the argument, so read a full and balanced review, not comments from someone who can never say anything positive about the industry.)

K4blades

Cardew wrote: »

The disagreements were about his very poor electrical knowledge - despite apparently being an EPC assessor, which means you have done a course that lasts a couple of days -

????Integrity in business.???

1) You can not do a course in 2 days, another lie.
2) An EPC is nothing to do with anything "electrical" which shows you don't know what you are talking about,
3) backed up by the fact that until someone else corrected you, you thought an EPC was a HIP.
4) to produce EPCs, an assessor needs to be accredited, similar to "Corgi", gets audited several times a year, and has to be CRB checked.....all of which is just a small part of what I do.

On the other hand, the big utility companies are quickly getting the reputation of legalised thieves, increasing prices the second whole sale prices increase, but then not cutting prices as their whole sale costs fall. Then there's all there dodgy cold calling and door knocking, misleading people to get them to switch suppliers.
Then there's the great oil cartel., OPEC, an organisation that has the sole aim of artificially manipulating the oil price, so it can be kept high when suits, something that would be illegal if based in the UK.

So if Cardew wants to talk about honesty, decency transparency, integrity, I'm all for it come on Cardew tell us who you work for and what you do, seeing as you think I should have made it clear about me. Until then, your posts mean nothing...just bullying.

Cardew

K4blades,
I have stated many times that I am an Electrical Engineer and have never worked for any energy company or in any industry connected with the gas/electricity/oil/solid fuel supply.

Nobody disputes that ASG are a good company, and that by far the majority of posts in the Green forum have complimented the company.

What I have tried to establish is what typical savings their customers will make from their 3.3kWp solar PV system.

Last year Sarah Dyson(from ASG) didn't dispute a figure of £100 a year and we had some discussion based on that figure.

Your rather heated posts do not add anything to the thread and the fact remains that you have a vested interest in promoting the concept, and as such you are discredited.

P.S.

Domestic Energy Assessor
2 days course • Level 3 diploma
Limited time
special offer £995 + VAT

grahamc2003

K4Blades, this thread is for discussing ASG, a company you have a business relationship with. Given an ASG rep some weeks ago thought a £100 saving in electricity bills was normal/typical/average, and recently the EST have revised their estimate of savings to typically £70, then on what basis is your assertion forcefully made on several occasions, that your customers/people of which you have knowledge (which I suppose may also be AGS cutomers) nromally/typically/on average save £200?

Why do you and ASG (who I assume will revise their estimate to the recent EST estimate) disagree by a factor of almost 3? That is a massive discrepancy in the main factor on which rent-a-roof potential customers make a very important decision which could affect them for 25 years.

If your assertion of a £200 saving is correct, then ASG and the EST are incorrect. Do you have an explanation of how they got their recently revised estimates so different from yours?

zeupater

Hi All

In light of the recent 'heated' discussion regarding potential savings, here's my viewpoint.

Firstly, a declaration. I have a pv system, I bought it, but who owns it doesn't make any difference ... I state this only because I don't want anyone classifying me as being anti-pv. Secondly, I will state that my only gripe with the 'rent-a-roof' operators is their ability to claim FiTs on an industrial scale commercial basis at a level which was designed to be appropriate for consumer funded domestic systems and I will continue to classify this as being a clever, but unfair, use of a loophole in the drafting of the FiT scheme. Apart from that, if anyone wishes to make use of systems provided for free on a 25 year legally binding contract basis, it is entirely up to them, as long as they are fully aware of the potential consequences of taking the decision and have in no way been mislead in the decision making process, which includes exaggeration of potential energy savings.

My own experience, having a system which is larger than the system supplied by ASG and other 'rent-a-roof' scheme operators, is that savings of much greater than £100 would be unlikely for a household with a normal energy usage pattern which is occupied during the day. If the household is unoccupied during the day the savings are likely to be around, or below, the EST's guideline of £70. For households with atypical usage patterns, such as those which operate small businesses with the likes of computer servers or banks of refrigeration equipment, it is easily possible to far exceed typical savings and could provide savings well in excess of £200, but these atypical cases should not be promoted as being typical by the industry.

Everyone should be made aware that estimated energy savings which are included in quotations for systems and are promoted by 'rent-a-roof' scheme operators are based on a SAP calculation provided by the BRE, who openly admit in their own documentation is based on a pure guess that 50% of generated energy would be self consumed, regardless of actual household usage or system total installed capacity, this being due to there being insufficient data available at the time that the calculation was developed. This is so obviously a flawed premise that giving credence to figures resulting from this particular SAP calculation is illogical and indefencible ..... I feel so strongly about this that I would challenge anyone from the BRE, the EST, or any other advisory body associated with renewables to challenge this viewpoint and prove that it is substantially incorrect.

For many, having pv installed will act as a catalyst to review the pattern of energy consumption. Savings made as a result of switching items such as televisions, microwaves and chargers off when not being used should not be classified as being solar pv savings, because they are not. Prior to having pv fitted we reduced our household energy usage to an extent that the resultant savings are significantly greater than those we see from the imported energy saved by the pv system.

I hope that this is considered to be a fair and unbiased analysis of the level of savings which are likely to be typical, made by someone without a vested interest in either the renewables or hydrocarbon industry sectors ......

HTH
Z

K4blades

Zeupater;
I think your post is fair and well balanced.

In my experience, the savings you mention from changing behaviour, for most people, they don't put that effort in before having panels fitted, they, we, tend to take the grid for granted.
When a person / family becomes more of a stake-holder in the power they use, then their behavior does change. If this is because of the fact that they have just had PVs fitted, then I would say that it is an indirect consequence, rather than a direct result of PV generation.

And just to clear up another bit of misleading information pedaled by some..
I do not have any sort of mad passion or obsession with PVs specifically, I am very keen on sustainability and not being dependant on fossil fuels and am happy to consider all types of renewables, etc....so I have an open mind on most issues in this area.....which is more than can be said about some.

Cardew

K4blades wrote: »

Zeupater;
I think your post is fair and well balanced.

So from zeupater’s 'fair and wel balanced' post, he concludes that from a bigger(20%) system than ASG’s 3.3kWp system:

that savings of much greater than £100 would be unlikely for a household with a normal energy usage pattern which is occupied during the day. If the household is unoccupied during the day the savings are likely to be around, or below, the EST's guideline of £70.

So how do you reconcile that with your statement:

I have done thousands of these in the past few years and I can tell you that it is quite typical for an average house to save over £200 from PV electricity, without FITs.
This calculation is done using software developed over many years, tested and approved by BRE and CLG, in other words the figures are relatively reliable.

M4ximillion

Right! So according to you, Cardew, a saving is only a saving if it is directly attributable to the free solar leccy. So, the fact that my consumption from the grid is down by 45% to what it was last year is enntirely irrelevant? So, that means that when my annual bill is down by £200 this year it is irrelevant and meaningless because I cant PROVE that it is to do with the panels on my roof. Fair enough Guess what? I dont care! All Im bothered about is saving money and thats what Im doing - Im a happy happy bunny:D

Cardew you defy logic!
(and are starting to sound desperate)

Also, can you tell me which power company to go to to who is only charging 10p per kwhour (inc 5% VAT i presume??) because i'll switch immediately;)

(Just edited this cause just realised there is a page 2 and didn't notice all the other posts on page 2 till now. Thought this thread was to do with ASG feedback but now noticed it is becoming another discussion thread where the anti bullies are populating once again. Am actually responding to Cardews post on page 1. )